I really hope I don’t regret engaging you, but here goes...

Then count yourself among them, Pseudo-Intellectual. At least I know who Merit Ptah is.

If the shoe fits....

In nomine felinorum?

Again, that idea came essentially from the British, American oil companies, and Truman, not Nixon or Kissinger. Dear Lord — read some Hourani for background or a textbook on the ME other than liberal bullshit.

If you had actually read what I wrote, you’d know I’m neither liberal nor conservative. Sorry to burst your bubble. Fifty-cent words change nothing.

Who controlled the oil in the 1940s? Hmm? I believe it was Ibn Saud. So yes, we did support an elite class of royals. Even as Ibn Saud set up his brothers to rule after him.

Yes, actually, there is a conflict. You keep attributing the bulk of Saudi royal dominance to the Nixon Administration, which is NOT historically accurate. The Americans DID favor Saudi Arabia, even in the 1940s, for the reasons I’ve stated. (Again, I know that neither liberals nor conservatives like to talk about the…

Uh, the Americans wanting oil somehow isn’t imperialism? Right, okay...

The Americans wouldn’t have been there without the British opening the door, so to speak. Same with the French, the Germans, and the Russians in the upper Levant.

India or China. Eventually, the Saudis will piss off the Chinese and that’ll spell economic doom for them.

Exactly right. Anyone who has worked or lived in Saudi KNOWS about the hierarchy of nationalities and races that exists. Talk to any Arab NOT from SA and they’ll tell you: Jordanians and Lebanese are treated meh, but not as terribly as, say, Egyptians or non-Sunnis. Filipinos and those from the Indian subcontinent are…

Actually, that was the UK (Lawrence of Arabia), not simply the US or Kissinger.

The criminals are in fact the United States, followed by the UK, Russia, China, and France. Read some history, yeah?

Yawn. Actually read what I wrote. Not all women have sex and not all sex is good. Yet all of these women have problems that are resolved (or not) by BC. I’m sorry that this is too difficult for you to understand.

Yawn. See my original point. Not all women have sex and not all sex is good. Yet those women still have physical health issues that need to be addressed (independent of their sexuality). I’m sorry that this is a difficult concept for you.

Regarding your sanity, I can’t speak on that — I’m not a psychiatrist.

Ah, typical pseudo-feminist. Did you even read the numerous posts on this topic by the women “concerned” about their sexual performance or are you just pissed off because someone challenged the notion that women should just be sexual doormats? I was specific, unlike you: these women are always talking about pleasing…

BC doesn’t work for all women (myself included), and yes, doctors need to be cognizant of that fact. However, this emphasis on sex drive is marginalizing and really beside the point. I haven’t seen much on what the effects are on actual health. Sex is NOT a human requirement, especially when we are close to a world…

Exactly right. Taking BC is a personal choice, but this bullshit about how it’s “poison" is harmful and even lethal. Several family members have endometriosis and PCOS; BC has been a life-saver for many of them.